Dualism states that two opposing, or opposite, ideas, things,
or categories mutually exist. A person holding such views is a dualist.
Such views are expressed in the humanities. For example, in anthropology
dualism may explain facts about man by two fundamental causes: reason or
the passions, soul or body; freedom or determinism. Dualism explains the
theory of knowledge by the confrontation of two different realities,
subjective
or objective; the religious cosmos in the terms of a perpetual conflict
between good and evil, which has always existed. As one examines any
dualistic
situation he discovers that the two opposites are usually considered as
coming from the same or similar source.

The perpetual conflict of good and evil, a prime dualistic subject, is
notably discussed when surveying the history of religion. When hearing
this
statement many think it only pertains to recent formalized religions, but
such dualism has an ancient aspect as well. This is seen in the ancient
religions centered on animism; that is the
belief in spirits of the same genus capable of doing good or benevolent
things or evil and injurious things. The results of the actions of the
spirits
determine whether it is good or evil, not the qualities themselves. Since
all these spirits are forces of nature they can be good in some respects
or circumstances and bad in others.

Moving onto more highly developed religions one finds that a supreme,
all-powerful spirit has emerged, called a great God. According to tribal
legends among the Native Americans, and tribes in central and north Asia
this supreme God is not the sole creator of the world, but has an
adversary
or collaborator who committed a malicious or stupid act that lead to
irreparable
harm. Such legends express the astonishment of men finding themselves in
the presence of evil and death, and expressing their belief that these
terrible
things do not belong to the essence of things, and they are not
attributable
to the supreme God. Here lies the germ of the dualism; the terrible things
are believed to have come from the second being even though his
independent
origin is never positively expressed. This being may be a creature of the
God, or his origin is omitted.

This dualistic struggle between good and evil is exhibited between the
sun god Re,
symbolizing
life and truth, and his antagonist snake god Apep,
Greek Apophis,
in the ancient Egyptian religion. Apep, a monster living in perpetual
darkness,
perpetually tried stopping Re's barque on its nightly journey through the
underworld. During this struggle between light and darkness, the gigantic
serpent is wounded by knives and spears hurled by Re's divine entourage.
In legend, Apep was the personification of darkness, evil, and chaos.
Occasionally
the deity was victorious for a short duration, but in the end Re
triumphed.
Apep was slain by Re who cut up his body and burned it. It is observed
that
both deities have the same divine nature but have opposite objectives.

The dualism theme is expressed again in the ancient Egyptian religion
with the legendary battle between Osiris
and Set or Seth.
Osiris, the grain god, was considered by some the counterpart of Re after
death. He was crucial to Egyptian agriculture; therefore, every king was
the divine embodiment of Horus
in life and became Osiris after death. From this evolved the Osirian
legend
found in the Pyramid Texts to be later popularized and embellished by the
Greek writer Plutarch. The legend describes Set as the adversary and
jealous
brother of Osiris who during a drunken party was persuaded by his brother
to step into a sarcophagus. Once inside the coffin was nailed shut and
thrown
into the Nile. This was followed by years of searching by Isis
who eventually found the body. She brought it home. On the journey back,
she breathed breath into the body and impregnated herself with Osiris'
semen
and bore his son Horus. Set was not always depicted as being evil.
According
to one legend he helped the sun-god Re when he was about to be swallowed
up by Apep. However, later Set became the personification of evil. Here
again, both parties share a divine nature but have opposite objectives
(Jordan
195, 233).

The Babylonian mythology shares a similar legend. Marduk,
the chief deity and tutelary god of Babylon, engages in the primordial
battle
with Tiamat,
the power of the ocean. He kills her, splitting her in half and uses parts
of her corpse to fashion heaven and earth. Tiamat fought him in revenge
for the death of Apsu, the deep. These were two opposing deities sharing
a divine nature (Jordan 158).

In Greek mythology the primordial battle was waged between Zeus
and the Titans,
Cronus, his
father, in particular. Cronus swallowed all of his children. Zeus escaped
the fate by trickery of Rhea,
his mother. In battle Zeus overthrew his father, making him vomit up his
brothers and sisters and also freed his aunts and uncles whom Cronus had
imprisoned (Jordan 296). This ushered in the Olympians.
Both deities shared the same nature; one was begotten from the other.

The strict personification of evil in a deity began with the religion
of Zoroastrianism, founded by Zoroaster or Zarathustra.
The exact time in which Zoroaster lived is uncertain; many give the date
of 6000 BC while others state 1200 BC. From the style of his teaching it
is generally accepted that he resided in north-east Iran. The broad
setting
of his religion was the Indo-Iranian tradition reflected in the Rg
Veda.
Also, the literature of Zoroastrianism deflects the times and conditions
of the era: …the practices described in sections of the Younger
Avesta are only those of agriculturalists and herdsmen. Stone
mortars,
pestles, and the ritual flint knife were implements associated with the
Neolithic times, were still being used, and bows and arrows were often
flint-tipped.
Events described in the Younger Avesta appear to possibly have occurred
as often in the Stone Age as in the Bronze (Settegast 213-214).

Other references indicate that it was an agricultural society. Such
renovation
was to occur through husbandry. Although ancient Iranian kings are claimed
to have invented husbandry, Zoroaster is said to be the first to embed it
into a religious system. Soil cultivation became a kind of worship to his
followers, "He who cultivates corn [grain] cultivates righteousness"
(Vendidad 3.1). . His aim was to secure both the material and spiritual
welfare of the "Good Creation," to renew and preserve the sanctity
of the world to restore it to a state of perfection. This hope is uttered
in the prayer "May we be those who will renew this existence"
(Y 30.9).

From these statements one sees that Zoroaster was not just a religious
leader but a social reformer as well. He strived to change the society
that
he lived in. He consciously felt himself physically powerless, filled with
a deep longing for justice; he sought the moral laws of the Ahuras
in order to establish tranquility for all, the strong and weak alike
(Boyce
19).

Zoroaster not only lived in an agrarian society but a warring one as
well. The Rg Veda describes the Indian society of the times with
Indra, the ideal warrior, nobly depicted. From the prophet's perspective
this sort of society was full of destructive forces which he wanted to
eliminate.
Many Iraniologists think possibly this was the most difficult
transformation
the prophet attempted to make upon his society. His initial step was the
separation of gods, replacing All of the Immortals as mentioned in the Vedas, the warrior gods such as Indra
and Mithra,
with those he called the Holy Immortals, benevolent gods toward the
people.

The Holy Immortals included Ahura
Mazda, Lord of Wisdom, and the six lesser Ahuras which he created
through
his Holy Spirit, Spenta Mainyu. According to Zoroaster these with other
divinities were the Yazatas
who helped mankind. Opposing them was Angra
Mainya and the Daevas.
This was the premise of the dualism of Zoroastrianism.

The basis for the premise was formed by the eternal struggle between
Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainya. These were both uncreated spirits, existing
in time, they were destined by nature to be constant combatants within the
physical world that Ahura Mazda, the good spirit, created; Angra Mainya,
the evil spirit, by nature would continually try to destroy the world and
everything in it. The Zoroastrians believed that Angra Mainyu would win
some battles but at the end of the world, the eschatological theory, he
would be defeated and good would triumph.

It is in Zoroastrianism that the nature of dualism changes and assumes
its more permanent characteristic. The common meaning of a dualistic
conflict
became good versus evil, right and/or wrong, and so on; the sources of
good
and evil were separate, both no longer came from a single source as in the
Aegean era. The Aegean gods, such as Zeus, were both good and bad; they
shared both qualities as their worshippers considered them deities with
human traits. Within the Zoroastrian theogony this changed, good and evil
came from separate sources, not one; dualism no longer was a combat
between
a more powerful versus a weaker god; it now involved the struggle between
the good, or perfect, deity against the evil one. This struggle, or war,
as shall be seen influenced most-later religious philosophies.

Ahura Mazda, as envisioned by Zoroaster, was the Creator divinity, the
good god and creator of the world and everything within it while Angra
Mainyu
was his adversary, the evil god, author of destruction, the continual
combatant
trying to destroy the word. This would become the classic definition of
moral dualism, the war between the forces of good and evil. As was noted
in Zoroastrianism the concept of Angra Mainyu came from Zoroaster's
experiences
with the harshness of life. The single new concept in Zoroaster's theogony
was the role of Ahura Mazda as the Creator God and not equal to the other
Ahuras as guardians of asha; otherwise his description of the world
theorized
possible causes for events as he saw them. By declaring the spirits, or
forces, of good and evil to be uncreated Zoroaster practically declared
them to be eternal; his assumption that good would eventually triumph over
evil might be called presumptuous by some. As it will be shown this
dualism
of good versus evil is only overcome by the concept of polarity.

Judaism is one of the first religions considered when discussing the
influences of Zoroastrianism. In 586 BC the Babylonian Empire conquered
the Jews, destroyed their Temple, and forced them into exile. This
captivity
lasted almost fifty years. In 539 BC the Persians, under the Achaemenid
King Cyrus, captured Babylonia. The next year, 538 BC, Cyrus issued a
decree
freeing the Jews, saying they were to be allowed to return to their
homeland.
He and his Achaemenid successors even went further by helping to rebuild
the Temple in Jerusalem. This generosity did not just come from religious
piety, other pagan groups were assisted too, but from the wisdom of
knowing
that grateful people were less likely to rebel.

However, all of the Exiles did not
choose to return to their homeland. The adaptable Jews had over the years
established themselves in Mesopotamia, settling there, starting
businesses,
entering politics and even rising to high positions in the imperial court.

Gradually change in Jewish thinking took place. Such change began during
their Exile and continued afterwards. The first change occurred in the
Jewish
faith itself; being in exile they had no Temple or sacrificial animals
which
were at the center of their faith. Also within this change was their
conception
of God who could no longer be looked upon as a tribal protector who would
save them from being conquered or exiled. They were forced to change their
past religious concepts and practices.

It is most likely that Zoroastrianism influenced Judaism
indirectly through everyday contact of the two populations living within
this Mesopotamian area. It seems unlikely that the Jewish religious
leaders
would have access to the Gathas and Yashts which were only accessible to
Zoroastrian priests. The material contained within these works was only
orally accessible to the ordinary Zoroastrians; therefore, their
teachings,
if spread, could only be spread by word of mouth. Also, the archaic
language
of such texts would have posed a barrier for the Jews. Another barrier
would
have been posed by the Jews themselves; even when in Exile the Jews
practiced
their faith by strictly, as possible, obeying their religious rules which
also served to separate them from outsiders. The Zoroastrians also had
their
own purity laws which they strictly followed. Thus, the only permitted
relation
between both groups was through oral communication.

As previously noted one of the first changes in Jewish religious thought
surrounded the concept of God. Even before the Exile thinkers were
beginning
to move away from the idea of God as a tribal protector to whom animal
sacrifices
were offered to a concept of a universal and absolute being who would be
adored by praises and moral actions. Among an exiled and enslaved people
such a concept began fermenting.

Both the Zoroastrians and the Jews believed in monotheism, but each
viewed
it differently. Whereas Zoroastrianism had one God, Ahura Mazda, who was
all good, Judaism had one God, Yahweh, who was believed to both reward and
punish. The Jews probably recognized the Zoroastrians as monotheists, but
clung to their belief in Yahweh; "I form the light, and create darkness;
and create evil; I, the Lord, do all these things" (Isaiah 45:7). It
is quite clear from this passage that even though both groups believed in
one God, for both he had different attributes. The God of the Zoroastrians
only gave beneficial or good things to his people while the God of the
Jews
rendered both good and evil. The Jewish concept of Yahweh is derived from
the monotheistic revelation attributed to Moses just as the concept of
Ahura
Mazda came from the revelation of Zoroaster; both concepts are unique and
independent.

A more readily recognized influence surrounds the idea of hell in an
afterlife. Before the Exile the Jewish teaching was that the souls of the
dead went to a dull, Hades-like
place
called Sheol; but after their Persian
contact, the idea of heavenly rewards for good and hellish punishment for
evil began in Judaism. This is recognizable because one of the Biblical
words for heaven is Paradise which is from the ancient Iranian words
pairi-daeza,
meaning "enclosed garden"; and is one of the very few distinctive
Persian barrowed words in the Bible. This moral view of an afterlife is
characteristic of Zoroaster's teaching initiated in the Gathas.

There is speculation that the concept in Judaism of a savior or messiah
was Zoroastrian influenced. In the book of Second Isaiah, written while
the Jews were in Exile, the prophet speaks of a Savior that will rescue
his people; there are some inferences to Cyrus as the Liberator. This
helped
to spur the Jewish general conception of the word savior as anyone helping
the Jewish people. Although there was a parallel between the words Saoshyant
and Savior, both assuming almost a divine
quality, this would later cause friction between Christians and Jews who
never accepted Christ as a divine
Savior.

As it will be shown the Christian Yahweh is more identical to Ahura Mazda
than the Jewish Yahweh; the Christian God is all good like Ahura Mazda and
in the same way is beneficial to his people. Many scholars believe that
similarities between religions indicate that the beliefs of older
religions
influence younger religions; this is a common workable theory, but it does
not seem definitive provable as other factors may also influence religious
development. Accepting this theory, one can say the Persian God more
fitted
the mode of the Christian God than the Jewish. Each is supreme,
monotheistic,
and beneficent. Likewise, with the Christians, as with Zoroaster, such a
God does not fit the world in which they found themselves living; how
could
an all-good God create a world, not perfect, having evil in it? They
possessed
the identical problem which Zoroaster faced; the evil could not come from
the all-good God, so there must be another source. The early Jews did not
face this predicament, as mentioned earlier, their God Yahweh, was
believed
to give both reward and punishment; they had eliminated the pure dualistic
God who just was beneficent to his people; but the Christians took the
dualistic
God back again.

However, the Christian are not entirely to blame. As seen in the article
The Devil the early Hebrews recognized the
deity Jehovah as possessing good and evil qualities. Jehovah was similar
to the Canaanite gods, in fact; originally he was considered a god among
many. Gradually, however, Jehovah took on the attributes of an omniscient
and omnipresent God. Also, during this early Hebrew period there was
belief
in angels that reign in God's court, a suspected Zoroastrian influence,
and in malignant and hairy spirits living in barren places which, one
might
say, gave rise to the belief in Satan.

As noted in The Devil Satan initially does not appear in the Old
Testament
as the arch-enemy of God, but in his first appearances he was sort of a
prosecutor trying persons before God. In the book of Zechariah, possibly
written in the later 6th century BC, the prophet sees Joshua, the high
priest,
standing in judgment before God. Satan is seen standing to the right of
Joshua probably as his accuser. Even within this early Biblical book Satan
is portrayed as a zealous prosecutor for which God admonishes him.

In the book of Job, written about one hundred years after Zechariah,
Satan is seen as the more malignant accuser. He joins a heavenly group
composed
of God and the Sons of God. He says, when asked, that he has been walking
on earth, leaving no doubt he can go between heaven and earth. As the
story
unfolds one sees that Jehovah allows Satan to tests Job's faith and Job
proved himself worthy. However, from this story three factors emerge which
characterize the current role of Satan, or the Devil, within the
Judeo-Christian
religion: First, Job, the human, has no determination as to the onset of
his fate. All he can do is accept it or reject it, this is his limited
choice.
Second, Jehovah, or God, is the initial character. He has the final say
as to what action that is to be taken. Nothing is done without his
approval.
Third, the Satan is the instrument of God. He can suggest to God courses
of actions to be taken; but he cannot put such actions into effect unless
and until God gives his approval. Fourth, it is still believed, as with
Job, that God and the Satan essentially still test men.

As can be seen Satan has gradually became the equivalent of the
Zoroastrian
Angra Mainyu. The dualism is intact again. The development of this evil
antagonistic deity which Christianity accepted began with the Hebrews as
has been demonstrated. The dualistic components are present even if they
are not identical. Both God and Satan are spiritual, sharing the same
nature;
instead of being twins, God created Satan. And, Satan is believed to be
almost as powerful as God. Satan, as believed, cannot do anything without
God's approval; he could not tempt and/or torment Job without God
authorizing
it. Only partially does he play the role of Angra Mainyu, the destroyer;
Angra Mainyu destroyed independently, Satan need God's approval.

However, Satan's spiritual destruction is the same as Amgra Mainyu's;
it is irreversible. This was true in the case of the sin of Adam.
After Adam sinned by eating the forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowledge
his and Eve's relationship with God in the garden of Eden could not be
restored
to where it had been before the sin; God was angered and compelled them
to leave the garden. In this sense, Adam and Eve had chosen wrongly just
as Zoroaster said the Daevas chose not rightly when the Deceiver came upon
them as they consulted; so they chose the worst purpose. As one can see
the relationship between God and Satan surrounding story of Adam and Eve
is similar to the relationship of Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu.

According to Zoroastrianism Angra Mainyu was evil by both nature and
choice. And, according to various teachings of both Judaism and
Christianity
Satan, or the Devil, also chose evil. One of the versions of this
occurrence
in the Old Testament the fuller description of the events appears in the
Book of Enoch. It had happened that
men of earth had produced beautiful and comely daughters which were seen
by some of the angels of heaven who lusted after them. These angels
decided
to take these daughters as their wives. The angels were of the order
called
the Watchers, or the sleepless ones. Their leader was Semjaza, or Azazel.
They supposedly descended Mount Hermon. Then they entered and defiled the
young women. They taught their wives charms and enchantments, botany and
cutting of roots. Azazel instructed men in the making of the weapons of
war: swords, knives and shields. He also taught them the evil art of
cosmetics.

It did not take much persuasion for the first century Christians to
connect
Lucifer and Satan to the serpent in the garden of Eden who tempted Eve.
But, strangely enough the book of 2 Enoch gives this graphic story too
along
with the Old Testament. It describes an archangel named Satanail trying
to make himself equal to God by seducing the Watchers to rebel with him.
They all were banished from heaven, and to revenge himself for his fall
Satanail tempted Eve in Eden. There is another version, according to the
Vita Adae et Evae that Satan refused to worship Adam, as the angels
were commanded to do by God, God became angry and hurled Satan with his
angels down to earth; therefore, Satan tempted Eve. Here the concept of
the Devil's pride which caused his rebellion is combined with angelic
jealousy
of man.

There are other versions of Satan turning against God by choice to make
his character similar to that of Angra Mainyu. Many scholars judge this
to be another example of Zoroastrian influence in Christianity.

Another seen influence is the Holy Spirit of God. In Zoroastrianism Ahura
Mazda is believed to have invoked through the Holy Spirit, Spenta
Mainyu, the six lesser divinities called the Amesha Spentas. The
Holy
Spirit especially in Christianity is to be God, notably in the Trinity
this
is referred to as the third person of God. Some authorities think the Holy
Spirit was indicated in Genesis when God created Adam; he blew his breath
into him. That breath was supposedly the Holy Spirit.

The Trinity in Christianity seems analogous to the heptad in
Zoroastrianism.
The heptad is composed of Ahura Mazda and the six lesser divinities
whereas
the Trinity consists of God, the Father; God, the Son; and God, the Holy
Spirit. Similarly, Ahura Mazda, believed to be father of the Amesha
Spentas,
with the help of his Holy Spirit, Spenta Mainyu, invoked the other
divinities;
whereas, God, the Father, through God, the Holy Spirit, incarnated God,
the Son. God, the Son, Jesus Christ
became incarnate through the virgin birth of Mary
similarly as the Saoshyant would become incarnate, born, of a virgin who
had bathed in Lake Kasaoya which had miraculously preserved Zoroaster's
seed within its depth.

At this point there seems to be no direct parallel between the figures
of the Saoshyant and the Son of God, Jesus Christ. As it has been shown
in Zoroastrianism Saoshyant gradually became pluralized to Saoshyans to
include any or all powerful people who helped the Zoroastrians in
achieving
their final goal of Separation. Such a plural concept would prohibit a
further
association of Saoshyant with Jesus Christ, a divine redeemer. Likewise,
this was why Judaism never accepted Christ, as previously noted, as their
savior or messiah. The Jews accepted more of the Zoroastrian description
of the Saoshyant or savior: anyone who helped the Jewish people; Jesus
failed
to meet their requirements.

Although Christ was believed to be the personal redeemer in Christianity
he certainly did not put an end to religious dualism; this is perfectly
clear in the Biblical description of his temptation. Even here Satan is
still seen as the antagonist of God in the person of Christ. After Jesus
had fasted for forty days and nights in the desert Satan tempted him three
times with worldly things promising to give them to Jesus if he would
worship
him. Christ said, "Begone, Satan, for it is written, 'Thou shall worship
the Lord, thy God, and him only shall you serve'" (Matthew 4:1-11).

Christ's role as personal savior did not put and end to the belief of
eternal damnation in Christianity either. For Christ said, "Verily,
I say unto you, all sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and
blasphemies
with which they shall blaspheme; but he that shall blaspheme against the
Holy Spirit has never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation"
(Mark 3:28-29).

Nor did Christ's role as personal savior end the conflict of good and
evil as Paul preached, "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood,
but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the
darkness
of this world, against the spiritual wickedness in high places" (Ephesians
6:12). In the same chapter Paul tells the people that their only defense
against such powers is the armor of God, comparing pieces of armor to an
attribute of God (v. 13-17). The disciple also speaks of victory, "And,
having spoiled [the] principalities and powers, he made a show of them
openly,
triumphing over them in it" (Colossians 2:15).

Thus, one can see from these passages even through Christianity does
promise personal salvation, it did not eliminate the threat of eternal
damnation
or the conflict of righteous dualism. Such a belief that the Christian God
both saves and condemns has become both difficult and confusing at times.
A notable example is the theologian and church leader Martin
Luther. Luther is a principle example of the intellect comprehending
the true nature of dualism without acknowledging it. To Luther, God
through
his omnipotence both created the cosmos and maintained everything within
it. God's will was absolute, there could be no absence of God, such a
phenomenon
was an impossibility for nothing would exist; therefore, God, the creator,
constantly cared for and ruled heaven, earth, hell, the Devil, and all
creatures.
Luther's belief in God's omnipotence was so strong that he completely
abandoned
the notion of human free will; here he differed from theologians such as
Augustine and Aquinas who affirmed free will but described the cosmos as
predetermined in fact.

Luther's teachings rested on his personal belief in the total, consuming
omnipotence of God. He believed that God was both remote and the immediate
cause of everything, he wills everything both good and evil. Luther stated
God is love, and the good that he willed was revealed through Jesus
Christ;
his stern will, the resulting hardships, appear to be the ways of the
Devil,
but they are not for God turn evil into ultimate good. Luther refrained
from going as far as to state that the Devil was the manifestation of one
side of God, but instead said, the Devil's will is only apparently God's
will; while the Devil and God may will the same thing, their purpose is
never the same. God has an ultimately benevolent purpose in every act,
while
the Devil's purpose is to destroy (Russell 37). To understand this with
the inferior intellect faith and grace are required. Luther explained
man's
inferior intellect often fails to see this but with divine grace it is
possible.
Luther by refraining from stating that the Devil was a manifestation of
one side of God failed to recognize and eliminate the divine dualism; if
the Devil was one side of God, and then there would be no dualism because
both good and evil would come from God.

The Christian Gnostics (see Gnosticism)
continued the cosmic dualism, but varied it in a different fashion. Good
and evil still existed, but resided in two different Gods. The Christian
God, Yahweh, they called the Demiurge, and they believe the good God was
aloof from the world. The Demiurge had been born of the Spirit of God,
wisdom,
personified as Sophia, the divine creative force. Sophia, without the
knowledge
of God, her mate, gave birth to her son, the Demiurge, a horrible looking
child. Unbeknown to the Demiurge his mother had given him some of her
power
which contained the Spirit, which he thought was his and with which he
created
the physical world. When doing this the Gnostics believed the Demiurge
entrapped
the Spirit in matter. They viewed the Demiurge as being the Christian God,
the creator, basing their belief on the statement, "I am God, and there
is no one besides me."

For the Gnostics this changed the dynamics of the dualism. It was no
longer between good and evil; they held the Christian God, called
Demiurge,
was evil representing the Devil; but between Spirit and matter since the
Spirit was entrapped in matter. This oppositional change of good versus
evil to spiritual versus material generated an overwhelming desire to
eliminate
the material among members of the Gnostic sects. This desire to eliminate
the material was based upon the belief that the Demiurge through creation
had entrapped the Spirit, especially in man, in matter, and the only way
to ultimately free the Spirit was not to prolong life through propagation.
This view was part of the intuitive or reflective knowledge, which the
Gnostics
called "gnois," which came from the study of man's inner self
or soul and illuminated the Logos to bring salvation. This led to a schism
among the sects. The majority of the sects practiced almost total
monasticism
and a few practiced libertinism. While some monastic sects permitted
marriage,
all sexual acts were forbidden. Many sexual acts and perversions were
permitted
and encouraged within the libertine sects. For example, the Ophites
-- a name which honored the snake or serpent -- were known for their love
feasts. The purpose of all the sects on both sides of the schism was the
same, to liberate the Spirit by stopping the propagation of life. The
Gnostics
took Jesus' answer to his disciple Solame's question, "How long will
death reign?" literally when he responded, "As long as you women
bear children" (Nigg 36). This was one of the major beliefs of Gnosticism
which caused the Orthodox Church to vigorously battle it.

Likewise, Manichaeism, being
another
Gnostic sect, preached a similar doctrine of positioning God against
matter.
This dualistic teaching embodied an elaborate cosmological myth that
included
the defeat of a primal man by the powers of darkness that devoured and
imprisoned
the particles of light. Thus, to Mani, the devil god which created the
world
was the Jewish Jehovah. Mani said, "It is the Prince of Darkness who
spoke with Moses, the Jews and their priests. Thus the Christians, the
Jews,
and the Pagans are involved in the same error when they worship this God.
For he leads them astray in the lusts he taught them."

The cosmic process of salvation goes on as the light is delivered back
to its original state. Thus, unlike Zoroaster, Mani appeared to believe
that the original state could be restored. Saving knowledge promoting this
process is delivered by the apostles of light among which Mani himself to
be the final one. Also through his self-conscious syncretistic thought
process
Mani included various Biblical figures along with Jesus, Buddha (see Buddhism)
and Zoroaster among these apostles
(Bowker 812).

During the Middle Ages there was the teaching of Martin Luther, as
previously
mentioned, but preceding him were the dualistic Gnostic teachings of the
Bogomils, Cathars,
and Paulicians; principally though
there
were the teachings of Saint Augustine. Augustine's dualistic teaching
rested
on his argument that everything which God, creator, had created was
essentially
good; thus, evil could only exist in the absence of good, that is, where
good should be. Augustine held that moral evil was the consequence if
freewill,
whereas, physical results from imperfection. Augustine set himself as
being
against Nature when establishing the "original sin" teaching.
He held that because of Adam's sin that all, of Adam's descendants, were
deprived of their original endowment from God, and thus suffered an
inherited
defect and can only be saved by God's grace (Bowker 109). In summary,
Augustine
believed in predestination, God knew what he wanted to do in the world,
but man, due to his fall because of sin, temporary interfered with the
divine
plan. Again, Augustine's argument materialized into a spiritual versus
natural
dualism.

Thus the resolution of the dualism, whatever it may be in terms of
opposing
concepts, weak versus strong, good versus evil, or spiritual versus
material,
usually does not disappear naturally or without some difficulty. The
reason
for this resides within the nature of the dualism itself; the opposing
concepts
which compose the dualism need to be resolved through agreement that
rarely
occurs. For this reason the dualism usually perpetuates itself and leads
to continual antagonistic feelings between parties holding the opposite
concepts.

As it has been shown throughout the article the principle dualism
permeating
Western society is good versus evil mainly originating from the Biblical
heritage of the spiritual versus the natural, which established the
Western
worldview or mindset. God is not deemed in nature, but above it or opposed
to it even through it is proclaimed God created the world, the universe,
and man. This absence of God from nature is the purposeful significance
of the Adam and Eve story or myth. By eating the fruit, the thing which
God forbade, the first man and woman separated themselves from God; the
hindrance of the sin. In truth, though, their sin was their act of
becoming
independent people. In Eden, they were one with God; God was one with
them,
walking in the cool of the evening with them, always guiding them. They
knew God, but not themselves or even their sex. And since Eve, the woman,
was the first bearer of life, now evil since it was absence the presence
of God, she and all who followed her have suffered ridicule and scorn.

Their gained knowledge was sinful in that it separated them from God;
they became conscious of themselves, their separateness or sex, and began
thinking for themselves. Here an unanswered question rises, didn't God
want
this? The answer lies within the Judeo-Christian worldview of God versus
nature, Adam and Eve were natural, human, now; no longer with God but
separate
from him; the world he made was separate too. Thus, anything separate from
God became synonymous with sin. Again the unanswered question arises did
God want this, or has man proclaimed it to be.

Joseph Campbell so aplty discusses this in The Power of Myth with Bill
Moyers in his discussion of The Message of Myth. Here he discusses the
Mask
of Eternity, which is really the mask of God. This huge mask contains a
face looking straight ahead; everything it sees is good, nothing is evil,
because it represents God in the center of everything. On either side of
the face are figures, male and female, walking away out from the center.
The figures symbolize people, humanity, entering the temporal world
composed
of opposites, or opposing forces or energies.

The temporal world is also finite, meaning it has dimensions, width,
height, breath, upper, lower, and so on, in other words, the physical
world.
The world which God is proclaimed to have made, but is not a part of; thus
giving meaning to Augustine's words, evil can only exist in the absence
of good, or God. Therefore, if God is absence from the world, then it is
evil, and will continue to be evil until God enters it, or a different
worldview
is accepted. Campbell said such a worldview is found in Buddhism and
Hinduism
where the divine is joined with nature.

This joining of the divine with nature also is celebrated in the
nature-based
religions such as Neo-paganism and Witchcraft. When the divine and nature
are joined, mingled, there are no more opposing forces or energies, all
become one forming a balanced whole--the harmonious world.

This is the Spiral Dance of the Goddess:

Alone, awesome, complete within Herself, the Goddess, She whose name
cannot be spoken, floated in the abyss of outer darkness, before the
beginning of all things. And as she looked into the curved mirror of
black space, She saw by her own light her radiant reflection, and fell
in love with it. She drew it forth by the power that was within Her
and made love to Herself, and called Her "Miria, the Wonderful."

Their ecstasy burst forth in the single song of all that is, was, or
ever shall be, and with the song came motion, waves that poured
outward and became all the spheres and circles of the worlds. The
Goddess became filled with love, swollen with love and She gave birth
to a rain of bright spirits that filled the worlds and became all
beings.

But in that great moment, Miria was swept away, and as She moved out
from the Goddess She became more masculine. First She became the Blue
God, the gentle, laughing God of love. Then She became the Green One,
vine-covered, rooted in the earth, the spirit of all growing things.
At last She became the Horned God, the Hunter whose face is the ruddy
sun and yet dark as Death. But always desire draws Him back toward the
Goddess, as He circles Her eternally, seeking to return in love (Starhawk
31).

To some reading this it may appear to be a feminine creation story. When
read in prose it is, analytically the beginning is similar to the
Judeo-Christian
story: And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the
face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters
(Genesis 1:2). And the Goddess…floated in the abyss of outer darkness,
before the beginning of all things. And God said, Let there be light, and
there was light (Genesis 1:3). The Goddess
became filled with love, swollen with love and She gave birth to a rain
of bright spirits that filled the worlds and became all beings. Already
a significant difference between the two creation stories is seen. In the
Biblical story God appears to be commanding things to happen or occur;
whereas
in the creation story of the Goddess she gives birth to everything from
the love which she has for herself. God's act of creation is more
intellectual
as emphasized by John: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with
God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All
things
were made by him; and without him not anything made that was made (John
1:1-3).

With the Goddess all beings are seen naturally being born from her,
"…swollen
(pregnant) with love and She gave birth to a rain of bright spirits that
filled the worlds and became all beings." The Mother Goddess gave birth
to the spirits which filled the worlds and became all beings as naturally
as the human mothers give birth to children. The beings born of the Mother
Goddess possess her nature just as human children possess their mother's
nature. There is no separation in this worldview; the Goddess nature fills
all things. This sameness, Goddess nature, is why Goddess worship can
simultaneously
be referred to as nature worship. The duality between the Divine and
nature,
and humanity and nature vanishes because all things are the same.Thus,
this
is the poetry of creation.

All beings in this worldview are part of the Goddess and she is part
of them. Most sharing this view or belief system feel "an aliveness
or 'presence' in nature" (Adler 4). Literally members of these loose-nit
nature-based religious groups, without formal dogma or set of beliefs, no
matter what they call themselves, Witches, neo-Pagans, or both, or just
being in the Craft or Pagan, feel the Goddess interacting with nature and
themselves; likewise, these individuals feel that they are interacting
with
the Goddess and nature.

Nature is once more acceptable, even death which is viewed as part of
nature. This is among the aspects of the Horned God, the Hunter, who as
well came from the Goddess. His face is the ruddy sun and yet dark as
Death.
The sun gives light to grow, but can burn as fire. Here are opposites, but
opposites having purpose: vegetation needs light with which to grow, but
when its utility is served it decays and needs to be destroyed or burned
away. Opposites are viewed as natural polarities, not as dualistic
combatants,
offering balance for the maintenance of nature. So it is why in her dance
the Goddess spiraled out from herself forming the Gods, symbolizing the
masculinity of nature. There are no sinful connotations placed upon
natural
functions such as life, sex, birth, death, and rebirth; they are seen as
life's functions coming from the Goddess.

One might question the inclusion of neo-Paganism and Witchcraft in an
article concerning dualism. The reason might be expressed as twofold. In
the discussion of dualism it was expressed that the first obvious cosmic
dynamic of religious dualism was stronger versus weaker, stronger deities
versus weaker ones; then the dualistic dynamics changed to good versus
evil,
right versus wrong. In various ways Witchcraft and Paganism were affected
by and have affected these dynamics. When discussing the struggles between
the stronger and weaker deities it should be noted they mostly belonged
to the Egyptian and Greek pantheons; the gods which ancient Witchcraft
worshipped,
and the same gods which are worshipped by current Witches and neo-Pagans.
These were the gods that the Judeo-Christian traditions attempted to
destroy
as they attempted to destroy Witches and heretics throughout the centuries
(see Burning Times).

Accompanying such destruction the Judeo-Christian traditions also helped
to enforce the change in the dualistic dynamics from stronger versus
weaker
to a more moralistic good versus evil. As it has been demonstrated the
process
of changing and/or eliminating gods began in Zoroastrianism and has been
incorporated to various degrees in both Judaism and Christianity. Now the
major portion of Western culture is moralistic, and to a certain extent
this applies to Eastern culture as well. Simply put, most people find
themselves
being governed by moralistic-based laws; laws, which to many, do not seem
moral at all. It is within the current Witchcraft traditions and
neo-Paganism
that ones find a resounding protest to such moralizing. Many within these
groups feel alienated by the progress of modern society and the formality
of institutionalized religion. Being gravitated to the polytheistic gods
of the pre-Christian religions they are urging a return to nature with
less
moralistic conformity. The individual, along with his needs, needs to be
more recognized; giving rise to the Rede: "Harm no one, and do what
you will." These two reasons seem to signify the significance for the
inclusion of Witchcraft and neo-Paganism in this discussion of dualism;
as with many things in life, dualism seems to have came full-circle.

This article has attempted to present a history of religious dualism
to show its social importance. An acknowledgement must be given to the
recognition
it will not change the attitudes of many in institutionalized religions
and such dualism will continue. However, for the objective minded it is
hoped that the possibility of future change or trying something different
has been presented.